Hi Hans,
On 18 November 2014 14:54, Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 11/18/2014 03:32 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >> Hi Hans, >> >> >> On 18 November 2014 11:23, Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 11/17/2014 07:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>>> Hi Hans, >>>> >>>> On 17 November 2014 15:48, Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> From: Luc Verhaegen <l...@skynet.be> >>>>> >>>>> Add simplefb support, note this depends on the kernel having support for >>>>> the clocks property which has recently been added to the simplefb >>>>> devicetree >>>>> binding. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Luc Verhaegen <l...@skynet.be> >>>>> [hdego...@redhat.com: Use pre-populated simplefb node under /chosen as >>>>> disussed on the devicetree list] >>>>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/display.h | 4 ++++ >>>>> board/sunxi/board.c | 11 +++++++++ >>>>> drivers/video/sunxi_display.c | 39 >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> include/configs/sunxi-common.h | 8 +++++++ >>>>> 4 files changed, 62 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/display.h >>>>> b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/display.h >>>>> index 8d80ceb..4c694f8 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/display.h >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/display.h >>>>> @@ -195,4 +195,8 @@ struct sunxi_hdmi_reg { >>>>> #define SUNXI_HDMI_PLL_DBG0_PLL3 (0 << 21) >>>>> #define SUNXI_HDMI_PLL_DBG0_PLL7 (1 << 21) >>>>> >>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_VIDEO_DT_SIMPLEFB >>>>> +void sunxi_simplefb_setup(void *blob); >>>>> +#endif >>>>> + >>>>> #endif /* _SUNXI_DISPLAY_H */ >>>>> diff --git a/board/sunxi/board.c b/board/sunxi/board.c >>>>> index e6ec5b8..d4530e8 100644 >>>>> --- a/board/sunxi/board.c >>>>> +++ b/board/sunxi/board.c >>>>> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ >>>>> #endif >>>>> #include <asm/arch/clock.h> >>>>> #include <asm/arch/cpu.h> >>>>> +#include <asm/arch/display.h> >>>>> #include <asm/arch/dram.h> >>>>> #include <asm/arch/gpio.h> >>>>> #include <asm/arch/mmc.h> >>>>> @@ -237,3 +238,13 @@ int misc_init_r(void) >>>>> return 0; >>>>> } >>>>> #endif >>>>> + >>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_BOARD_SETUP >>>>> +void >>>>> +ft_board_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd) >>>>> +{ >>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_VIDEO_DT_SIMPLEFB >>>>> + sunxi_simplefb_setup(blob); >>>>> +#endif >>>>> +} >>>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_OF_BOARD_SETUP */ >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/video/sunxi_display.c b/drivers/video/sunxi_display.c >>>>> index 3f46c31..74c4bd3 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/video/sunxi_display.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/video/sunxi_display.c >>>>> @@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ >>>>> #include <asm/arch/display.h> >>>>> #include <asm/global_data.h> >>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>> +#include <fdtdec.h> >>>>> +#include <fdt_support.h> >>>>> #include <linux/fb.h> >>>>> #include <video_fb.h> >>>>> >>>>> @@ -416,3 +418,40 @@ video_hw_init(void) >>>>> >>>>> return graphic_device; >>>>> } >>>>> + >>>>> +/* >>>>> + * Simplefb support. >>>>> + */ >>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_OF_BOARD_SETUP) && defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_DT_SIMPLEFB) >>>>> +void >>>>> +sunxi_simplefb_setup(void *blob) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + static GraphicDevice *graphic_device = >>>>> &sunxi_display.graphic_device; >>>>> + int offset, ret; >>>>> + >>>>> + if (!sunxi_display.enabled) >>>>> + return; >>>> >>>> return -ENOENT? >>> >>> If people want this, I can change the proto to an int and make >>> sunxi_simplefb_setup >>> return error codes as you suggest, but this function gets called from >>> ft_board_setup which is void itself, so there is no where to propagate the >>> error, >>> and more-over we do not want simplefb setup errors to be treated as fatal, >>> so >>> I see little use in having it return error codes. >> >> ft_board_setup() will soon change to return an error. Will likely >> merge those patches next week. > > That is good to hear, but not relevant in this case, as said: > > "more-over we do not want simplefb setup errors to be treated as fatal" > > Main reason for this is that older dtb-s do not have the pre-populated > simplefb node. I guess it could be argued that not having the node > should be a warning (and return 0), and the other errors should be > real errors. I can be convinced to make that change, let me know either > way. Yes that sounds right to me. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot